Crunch time for Golkar chief Akbar Tandjung

Crunch time for Golkar chief Akbar Tandjung

John Mcbeth,
The Straits Times,
Asia News Network,
Singapore

Golkar chairman Akbar Tandjung has a well-deserved reputation
as a canny strategist with an instinct for survival. But even he
may have his work cut out controlling the outcome of this month's
party congress.

It will be by far the most important Golkar gathering since
president Soeharto's fall from power more than six years ago.

At stake is not only Akbar's future as party leader but also
the shape of political alignments in the new House of
Representatives where Golkar controls 128 of the 550 seats and,
for now at least, has taken a position in opposition to new
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Only Golkar deputy leader Marwah Daud Ibrahim -- from the
party's minority Sulawesi wing -- has openly declared her
candidacy so far for the party leadership.

But two outsiders, media baron Surya Paloh, the choice of
Golkar-affiliated Vice-President Jusuf Kalla, and former armed
forces chief Wiranto, the party's losing presidential candidate,
are expected to mount challenges as well when party delegates
assemble in Bali for five days from Dec. 15.

Jusuf was interested in contesting the chairmanship himself,
but was dissuaded from doing so by the president's aides, who
told him that it would be a conflict of interest.

Little is known about the ambitions of House Speaker Agung
Laksono, who has an uneasy relationship with Akbar, and
controversial Economic Coordinating Minister Aburizal Bakrie,
whose inclusion in the Cabinet was clearly designed to lure
Golkar's rank-and-file into the government fold.

Although Susilo has been engaged in an early test of wills
with the so-called Nationhood Coalition, comprising Golkar, PDI-P
and Muslim leader Abdurrahman Wahid's National Awakening Party
(PKB), the coalition is unlikely to prove much of an obstacle to
the President's pushing through his legislative agenda.

Once government legislation reaches the Parliament's 11
commissions, party discipline always tends to break down.

The concept of a genuine political opposition remains quite
foreign to Indonesia, largely because lawmakers have nothing in
the way of ideology, platforms or policies to steer them away
from self-interest and what often amounts to state-sanctioned
bribery to get laws passed.

Akbar could very well face searching questions from party
members over his opposition stance, which his critics complain
was initially aimed at trying to ensure his own survival rather
than furthering party interests.

It should not be forgotten that Golkar's 128 seats in a
greatly expanded House are only 10 more than what it secured at
the party's lowest point in 1999. Indeed, for many party members
-- particularly those in eastern Indonesia -- staying in semi-
opposition probably makes increasingly little sense when there is
a lot more money to be made by lining up behind Susilo.

Signs of a crack in the party leadership's resolve came only
recently when senior Golkar politician Theo Sambuaga, the
chairman of Parliament's defense commission and an Akbar ally up
to now, conceded that it was the President's prerogative to
choose a new commander of the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI).

Up until then, the commission had backed outgoing president
Megawati Soekarnoputri's last-minute appointment of Army Chief of
Staff General Ryamizard Ryacudu -- a hardliner whose
uncompromising stance on many issues appears to be out of step
with Susilo's moves towards a promised new wave of reformation.

In countries such as Indonesia and Thailand, where the
military has traditionally had an important place in the power
equation, generals get very upset at political interference in
military appointments.

Akbar was elected as Golkar leader at the party's last
congress in Jakarta in 1998, defeating former defense minister
Edi Sudradjat, who later went on to found the Indonesian Justice
and Unity Party (PKPI) -- one of the minority groups now
supporting Susilo.

Akbar, a 58-year-old apparatchik with only a faint blush of
charisma, assumed the leadership at a time when anti-Golkar
sentiment was running high over the party's role as Soeharto's
political machine during his 32-year rule.

Although Golkar fell badly behind PDI-P in the 1999 elections,
Akbar's work in consolidating, if not reforming, the party earned
him a wide following that he still largely enjoys on the central
board and among the 33 provincial branches.

His Achilles' heel, however, comprises 428 district chapters,
whose control over the balance of power in the party was
underlined last May when Golkar opted for General Wiranto over
Akbar as its presidential nominee.

One of the key issues at the coming congress will be who is
allowed to vote for a new party leader. As things stand, only the
100-man central board, provincial-level chapter delegates and
representatives from 10 different subsidiary organizations may
cast ballots.

Participants say it was the sense of the last congress that
the party's regulations should be changed to allow district
delegates to take part in choosing the 25-man executive board.
But in what Akbar's opponents now see as an act of manipulation,
that proposal was not included in the secretariat's final report
on proceedings. Marwah Daud Ibrahim, for one, has made it clear
that she will call for the presidential convention process to be
included in Golkar statutes to ensure the party's commitment
towards democracy.

Another hotly contested issue will be the rules of eligibility
for party chairman.

Up to now, candidates have only had to be actively involved
for five years in the affairs of Golkar or its ancillary
organizations. But under a new proposal, which reflects Akbar's
control over the party machinery and his willingness to use it,
candidates will have had to spend five years as members of the
central board or provincial committees -- which would rule out
both media baron Paloh and Gen. Wiranto.

Creating a split at the congress would work in Akbar's favor
given the support he has had up to now from 60 percent of the
central board.

What is not so clear is what more he can offer his supporters
to keep them loyal.

In the end, whether Akbar survives or not, Golkar is unlikely
to continue along its current path.

Short of testing the limits of Indonesia's presidential
system, it makes no sense to take a confrontational stand against
a president who has a greater public mandate than any Indonesian
leader before him.

It also makes no sense considering the fact that Susilo has
barely begun his presidency.

And it makes no sense at all for Golkar itself, at a time when
voters have made it patently clear that they are not happy with
the country's established parties.

Thanks to a potent combination of democratization and
decentralization, the Indonesian electorate has sent politicians
a message they would be wise to take heed of.